Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Is this legal?

124»

Comments

  • #92
    Fol20
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,625 ✭✭✭Fol20


    4ensic15 wrote: »
    The RTB have advertised for inspectors and are going through the selection process. The RTB's legal powers have changed. The current situation will not persist for much longer.

    You could be right. Have they confirmed when ll need to pay annual charges also?


  • #93
    davindub
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,447 ✭✭✭davindub


    Gatlin Billions Soup wrote: »
    The only thing that linked case tells us is the tenant taking the cause was an unbelievable b*llocks who you would hope will struggle badly to get a rental again.

    I would have no heed whatsoever into any thing else as Intend to sell means “Intending” nothing more. The fact no one is agreeing with you should be a sign.

    If you are a LL as you claim I’ve no idea why you are pushing this agenda, you should be heavily supporting the opposite and ensuing people interpret the would “intend” the way I and others do.


    That's the only thing? You do know what the high court is to the RTB?

    As I did say, time will sort this out for us, and we can re-visit the comments you and I have made then.

    I don't see posting incorrect or biased information as supportive to LL's.

    BTW I don't see it as LL's vs tenants. I see honest LL's & tenants vs dodgy scumbags, the dodgy LL's are responsible for the legislation currently in place and the dodgy tenants are the risk we must bear while our industry appears to be dirty.


  • #94
    Fol20
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,625 ✭✭✭Fol20


    davindub wrote: »
    That's the only thing? You do know what the high court is to the RTB?

    As I did say, time will sort this out for us, and we can re-visit the comments you and I have made then.

    I don't see posting incorrect or biased information as supportive to LL's.

    BTW I don't see it as LL's vs tenants. I see honest LL's & tenants vs dodgy scumbags, the dodgy LL's are responsible for the legislation currently in place and the dodgy tenants are the risk we must bear while our industry appears to be dirty.

    Id love to see your explanation of how dodgy ll have caused this legalisation...

    - LL that increase rents to maximise profits that caused the RPZ are what business objectives are, we are not a charity and if you think otherwise, your in the wrong line of work.
    - The ll that made substantial improvements to get better clientele and or achieve better rent is normal in a competitive environment to add value to your product and to increase margins.

    All the legislation that has been brought in is to distract the masses from the real solution and to make the gov appear like they are taking action when in fact they are making it worse. This legislation is a direct result of poor governmental policy for the past 10 years. It is nothing else but this and for you to say otherwise shows your motives in this.


  • #95
    davindub
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,447 ✭✭✭davindub


    Fol20 wrote: »
    Id love to see your explanation of how dodgy ll have caused this legalisation...

    - LL that increase rents to maximise profits that caused the RPZ are what business objectives are, we are not a charity and if you think otherwise, your in the wrong line of work.
    - The ll that made substantial improvements to get better clientele and or achieve better rent is normal in a competitive environment to add value to your product and to increase margins.

    All the legislation that has been brought in is to distract the masses from the real solution and to make the gov appear like they are taking action when in fact they are making it worse. This legislation is a direct result of poor governmental policy for the past 10 years. It is nothing else but this and for you to say otherwise shows your motives in this.

    Each amendment is a reaction to something highlighted in the media, why do you think you now need to get a statutory declaration signed when selling?

    Little hint for you RTA 2004, 2019 - 2004 = more than 10 years.

    But it's not my explanation, it's public record...


Advertisement